Authorized Deception: An Approach to the Effective and Ethical Use of Placebo Research

Regarding the ‘cost’ and ‘benefit’ consideration in deception used in placebo research, Miller, Wendler, and Swartzman (2005) are concluding that an appropriate balance between research value and ethical protection of research participants should and can be found and approved by the Ethics Committees.

Rather than looking at a specific amount of deception, a solution that is allowing using deception as a necessity to test the placebo effect effectively in an ethical manner is suggested by Miller et al. (2005) and called ‘authorized deception.’ Blease, Colloca, and Kaptchuk (2016) are calling the same approach ‘open -label placebo’ that is based on the disclosure of the possibility to research participants that deception can be used regarding the administration of true treatments or placebos. Such an approach has a big advantage that fully informed consent can be ensured (Miller et al., 2005). According to Martin and Katz (2010), participants in an experimental pain study were responding to the same extent to the placebo effect, whether they were left unaware of possible deception or not. Furthermore, patients seem to value informed consent over not being warned about the use of placebo (Martin & Katz, 2010). As recent study results indicate that open-label placebos are an effective research method (Petkovic et al., 2015), it is to hope that it will be used more frequently to protect participants from any unnecessary distress and researchers from ethical dilemmas damaging the reputation of research teams and the scientific field overall.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About mathias sager

Independent researcher, artist, social entrepreneur, and leadership and strategy advisor I was born in Zurich in 1975 and grew up in Switzerland. Currently, I’m living in Tokyo. I love open-minded people everywhere and the passion to working relentlessly for developing human potential, which is an overarching theme throughout all his work. I have extensive experience in leadership and management, organizational psychology research, and learning & development practice. I have worked as a teacher, a leadership trainer, as well as a senior manager responsible for client relationships, counseling, and virtual teams around the world. Also, I’m a social entrepreneur and serving as a strategy and leadership advisor in different ways. My goal is to inspire with interdisciplinary, innovative, and cross-cultural approaches to personal and professional development for the people’s individual well-being and common good alike. Continuously learning himself and keen to help, I appreciate any questions or feedback you may have at any time. Please connect here on any social media, as well as per direct email goodthings@mathias-sager.com.

Hi Jonathan. Thanks for your addition! Leaving it unknown to participants and researchers who is in the control and who in test group (double-blindness) should avoid bias, I agree. Keeping the use of placebo secret though doesn’t seem to add more to the placebo effect, therefore it is ethically and from a research benefit perspective appropriate to disclose the possibility of placebo involvement in any case.

Being a clinical study assistant in the past, I know in medical research placebo’s are used frequently and indeed to add a level of objectivity. Objectivity seems to me very important to get valuable results. At the same time, there have been done already a lot of research; if it is indeed the case that in specific areas/studies people are more distressed, then I think we should find new research methods.